Judgment L.P.Singh, J. 1. Both the Criminal Appeal No. 293 of 1992 and Criminal Appeal No. 295 of 1992 arise out of the same judgment and have been heard together hence they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The appellant Madan Paswan of Criminal Appeal No. 293 of 1992 has been convicted u/s. 412 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to -undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. 3. The appellant Uma Shankar Sao of Criminal Appeal No. 295 of 1992 has been convicted u/s. 412 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. 4. The prosecution case disclosed from the fard beyan of the informant Ram Binay Gupta is that on 20.6.1985 the informant was coming from Dhanbad to Gaya by Jammu Tabi Express train and when the train arrived at Paharpur Railway Station and thereafter proceeded towards Gaya, a dacoity took place in the compartment and passengers were looted in the running train. The miscreants variously armed entered into the compartment and started assaulting and looting articles from the passengers. It has been submitted that the miscreants looted a golden ring, Rs. 300/- cash from the informant and a diary of his elder brother in which photograph of his brother and sister-in-law was there, some cloths and an admit-card which was issued by Agra Radio and Television Training Centre in his name. After looting the articles the dacoits got down from the train at the outer signal of Bandhua Railway Station. It has further been submitted that though the miscreants were unknown but the informant claimed to identify them if shown. Thereafter he got down from the train at Gaya Railway Station where his fard beyan was recorded at G.R.P., Gaya at platform No. 1 and he signed over his fard beyan i.e. Ext. 2. 5. On the basis of fard beyan a formal F.I.R. was registered against the unknown persons. After investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons under Ss. 395 & 412 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, cognizance was taken and case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. 6. The appellants pleaded not guilty and have stated that they have falsely been implicated in this case due to enmity. 7. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined altogether 12 witnesses. 8. 395 & 412 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, cognizance was taken and case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. 6. The appellants pleaded not guilty and have stated that they have falsely been implicated in this case due to enmity. 7. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined altogether 12 witnesses. 8. P.W. 1 is Sita Ram Prasad, a Judicial Magistrate who held the Test Identification Parade. P.W. 2 is Bharat Sharan, one of the passengers of the said train. P.W. 3 is Krishna Prasad. He has been tendered. P.W. 4 is Ram Binay Gupta, the informant of this case. P.W. 5 is Dashrath Rai. He is a formal witness and he has proved Ext. 3. P.W. 6 is Padarath Upadhyay. He is also a formal witness and he has proved Ext. 4. P.W. 7 is Dhirendra Kumar. He has proved Ext. 5. P.W. 8 is Shambhu Sharan. He is a formal witness and he has proved Ext. 5/A. P.W. 9 is Surendra Prasad, a formal witness and he has proved Ext. 5/B. P.W. 10 is Naresh Ram. He is a seizure list witness and he has proved Exts. 6, 6/A & 6/B. P.W. 11 is Ashlok Prasad. He is also a seizure list witness. He has proved Exts. 5, 5/A & 5/B and also the hand writing of S.I. which is marked as Exts. 6/D, 6/E, 6/ F & 6/G and P.W. 12 is Suraj Prasad Jaiswal. He is the Investigating Officer of this case. 9. P.W. 1 Sita Ram Prasad who has conducted the T.I. Parade of the stolen articles has stated that P.W. 4 Ram Binay Gupta, the informant and P.W. 2 Bharat Sharan were called for identifying the stolen articles In which some articles were of general use but P.W. 4 Ram Binay Gupta Identified Admit Card issued in his name. P.W. 2 Bharat Sharan identified his cheque book issued in his name and photograph of his sister-in-law. 10. P.W. 2 Bharat Sharan has also corroborated the factum of train dacoity. According to him, he was travelling from Gomo to Gaya. On that day in the train in which dacoity was committed, about 15-16 persons boarded the train at Paharpur Railway Station. They were armed with pistols and started looting the articles from the passengers. 10. P.W. 2 Bharat Sharan has also corroborated the factum of train dacoity. According to him, he was travelling from Gomo to Gaya. On that day in the train in which dacoity was committed, about 15-16 persons boarded the train at Paharpur Railway Station. They were armed with pistols and started looting the articles from the passengers. He has stated that the dacoits had taken away his brief-case in which some cloths, a golden ring and cash of Rs. 4,000.00 was kept. He has also stated that his cheque book of current account of Canara Bank, Gaya was also taken. His two photographs and one photograph of his sister-in-law, one diary and also his passport were taken away by the dacoits. According to him he was called for identifying the stolen articles recovered by the Police. He identified the photographs, his diary, cheque book and also his passport. He also identified some articles of general nature, such as, Banarsi Sarees, blouse and other cloths. 11. P.W. 3 Krishna Prasad has been tendered. 12. P.W. 4 Ram Binay Gupta, the informant of this case has fully supported the case of prosecution as stated in his fard beyan. According to him he was travelling in the train from Dhanbad to Gaya. When the train reached at Paharpur Railway Station some miscreants boarded in the train boggy in which he was travelling. They were variously armed with Phasuli and pistols and they started assaulting and looting the passengers. His golden ring and Rs. 300/- and also a diary in which his elder brothers name was written were taken away. He stated that the dacoits also took away the Identity Card Issued in his name by a radio and television training centre. According to him, he got the case recorded at G.R.P., Gaya. His fard beyan was recorded and he signed over the same which is marked as Ext. 2. He also took part in the Test Identifiqation Parade of stolen articles conducted by P.W. 1 Sita Ram Prasad, Judicial Magistrate. He identified his stolen certificate issued by Agra Radio and Television Centre and also his LUNGI and towel Ext. 9. He has stated in his cross-examination that the towel which he identified was not having trade mark on it but it was having a cut by the rat at the corner of towel. 13. P.W. 5 Dasrath Rai is a formal witness. 9. He has stated in his cross-examination that the towel which he identified was not having trade mark on it but it was having a cut by the rat at the corner of towel. 13. P.W. 5 Dasrath Rai is a formal witness. He has proved writing of A.S.I. on the F.I.R. i.e. Ext. 3. 14. P.W. 6 is Padarath Upadhyay. He is also a formal witness. He has proved writing of A.S.I. on seizure list Ext. 4. 15. P.W. 7 is Dhirendra Kumar. He has proved writing of S.I. Madhusudan Singh Ext. 5. 16. P.W. 8 is Shambhu Sharan. He is a formal witness. He has proved the writing of S.I. Madhusudan Singh Ext. 5/A. 17. P.W. 9 is Surendra Prasad, a formal witness. He has proved the hand writing of S.I. Madhusudan Singh Ext. 5/B. 18. P.W. 10 is Naresh Ram. He is a seizure list witness and he has proved Exts. 6, 6/A & 6/B. 19. P.W. 11 is Ashlok Prasad. He is also a seizure list witness. He has proved Exts. 5, 5/A & 5/B and he has also proved the hand writing of S.I. which was marked as Exts. 6/D, 6/E, 6/F & 6/G. 20. P.W. 12 is Suraj Prasad Jaiswal, the Investigation Officer of this case. He has stated that he was posted at Gomo as Inspector of Police. He investigated the case. He got the materials recovered from two accused for which seizure list was prepared with the signature of independent witnesses. He also saw the stolen articles In Test Identification Parade, Thereafter he submitted charge-sheet against two accused persons under Ss. 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. 21. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellant Madan Paswan has been convicted u/s. 412 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years on the basis of recovery of looted articles which was marked as Ext. 4. In this regard he has submitted that it is apparent from Ext. 4 that one Suresh Kumar and Krishna Prasad are said to be the witnesses on the point of seizure but the aforesaid two named witnesses Suresh Kumar and Krishna Prasad have not been examined during the course of trial. As such the prosecution has failed to prove recovery of the looted articles during dacoity which has been described in Ext. 4. As such the prosecution has failed to prove recovery of the looted articles during dacoity which has been described in Ext. 4. It has further been stated that non-examination of the seizure list witnesses has prejudiced the case of the appellants. As such the conviction of the appellant Madan Paswan u/s. 412 of the Indian Penal Code is illegal and bad in law. It has also been submitted that P.W. 2 Bharat Sharan has stated in his examination-in-chief at para 2, had made his fard beyan before the G.R.P. but P.W. 12, the Investigating Officer of this case has not corroborated the statement of P.W. 2 in his examination-in-chief. As such the statement of P.W. 2 that he had given his fard beyan before the G.R.P. has not been corroborated from the deposition of P.W. 12, the I.O. Accordingly, the statement of P.W. 2 is not admissible in the eye of law on the point of dacoity of looted articles and its seizure. 22. From the submission of learned counsel for the appellants it appears that the articles allegedly recovered from the possession of appellant Madan Paswan as listed at Ext. 4 has not been proved by the seizure list witnesses, namely, Suresh Kumar and Krishna Prasad as they were not examined by the prosecution even statement of Bharat Sharan P.W.2 about the looted articles also has not been brought on record neither it has been corroborated by P.W. 12, the I.O. Though he has stated that he gave his statement at G.R.P. at Gaya but the same is not on record. There is no written report which of the articles were looted from P.W. 2. He has, for the first time, stated about the looted articles in the Court during trial. It is also pertinent to mention that no T.I. Parade of the accused persons were held, as such they were not identified and were not convicted u/s. 395 of the Indian Penal Code. Thus the prosecution failed to prove that the recovered articles from the possession of appellant Madan Paswan for which seizure list Ext. 4 was prepared beyond all reasonable doubt and appellant Madan Paswan thus deserves benefit of doubt. Accordingly, his appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence passed by the Court below against him are set aside. He is acquitted of the charges framed against him and he is set at liberty. 23. 4 was prepared beyond all reasonable doubt and appellant Madan Paswan thus deserves benefit of doubt. Accordingly, his appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence passed by the Court below against him are set aside. He is acquitted of the charges framed against him and he is set at liberty. 23. So far the appellant Uma Shankar Sao is concerned, the articles recovered from his possession for which seizure list Ext. 5 has been prepared is proved by both the witnesses P.W. 10 Naresh Ram and P.W. 11 Ashlok Prasad, not only that the recovered card of Agra Television Institute is mentioned in the seizure list as well as in the deposition of P.W. 4 Ram Binay Gupta which goes to prove that the stolen property was recovered from the possession of appellant Uma Shankar Sao and the same was looted in the train dacoity committed on 20th June, 1985. As such the prosecution has been able to prove the case punishable u/s. 412 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant Uma Shankar Sao. The Court below rightly convicted him u/s. 412 of the Indian Penal Code. 24. I do not find any reason to interfere with the conviction of this appellant. 25. Coming to the question of sentence, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the occurrence took place 22 years ago and the appellant has been convicted u/s. 412 of the Indian Penal Code and charges u/s. 395 of the Indian Penal Code could not be proved. It has been further submitted that he is the first offender and there is no criminal history against him. As such some lenient view may be taken while awarding the sentence to the appellant. 26. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the appellants, I am of the view that it will be expedient in the interest of justice if the sentence of R.I. for 7 years is reduced to that of R.I. for 3 years. 27. With the aforesaid modification in the sentence the appeal against the appellant Uma Shankar Sao is dismissed.